Planning Commission - 06/12/2023APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, JUNE 12, 2023 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Frank Sherwood, Andrew Pieper, Ed
Farr, Carole Mette, Robert Taylor, Dan Grote,
Charles Weber; Phou Sivilay
CITY STAFF: Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner; Carter Schulze, City
Engineer; Matt Bourne, Parks & Natural Resources
Manager; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Acting Chair Farr called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Commission members Pieper and Sivilay were absent.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Mette to approve the agenda. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
IV. MINUTES
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Weber to approve the minutes of May 22, 2022.
MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CODE AMENDMENT FOR A FLEX SERVICE ZONING DISTRICT
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to the creation of a Flex Service
Zoning District
Barnhart presented the staff report. The Flex Service zoning district is intended to
provide flexibility and incentives for redevelopment or reinvestment on the
property without loss of existing rights and opportunities provided by current city
code. Currently, all the parcels guided for Flex Service are zoned Industrial. All of
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 12, 2023
Page 2
the existing uses on these properties will be permitted uses in the Flex Service
zoning district or have been approved though a Planned Unit Development.
There were two areas of focus, one north of Highways 212 and 5 and west of
Mitchell, and the other near the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Pioneer Trail.
Other areas could be included in the future but these two were initially identified.
This new zoning district provides flexibility in site design, uses, parking
requirements, building materials, and signage when compared to existing zoning.
Uses allowed in Flex Service would be those allowed in Industrial plus several
uses currently permitted in Commercial zoning districts, including major/minor
auto repair, gymnasiums, manufacturing, warehouse and small brewers, and
micro-distilleries and retail sales and services.
The restriction of retail in Industrial zones is proposed to increase from 15 to 25
percent. Parcels adjacent to any principal arterial could go to 100 percent retail.
These were arteries with the highest amount of traffic.
The new zoning district would allow for flexibility in parking in one of three
ways: 1. by meeting the published standard, 2. obtain a PUD waiver or 3. prepare
a parking plan for Council approval. The draft includes several parameters within
which a parking plan would be evaluated.
Building materials in the new district would have the following standards:
Lot frontages on arterial streets would meet Commercial standards;
Lot frontages on other streets would meet Industrial standards;
All others would have a proportion 60/40 of Class I and Class II materials.
This only adjusts building materials, and no changes to roof or plane articulation
are suggested.
Signage flexibility would follow industrial standards and wall signage allowed
would be the same as Commercial.
Barnhart explained this Flexible Service zoning district had been generally
presented to the Chamber of Commerce in early May, and no comments have
been received.
Grote asked for and received clarification that restaurants were classified as retail.
Mette asked if there was a parking mechanism in place to trigger the City to
reexamine a parking proposal. Barnhart replied there were frequent use changes,
and staff would apply zoning and land use process, then go through the
administrative process or a Planning Commission review. Mette noted
commercial kennels/dog daycare were not allowed as the district was presently
defined and asked for background. She recommended these be allowed in Flex
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 12, 2023
Page 3
Service. Barnhart said creating the district was a balance, and this could be looked
at in the future, but more jobs-related criteria had been used.
Mette objected to the retail restriction suggesting those be allowed a minimum of
25 percent instead. She found a blurry line between a gymnasium and other
athletic uses (such as fitness centers, new pickleball facilities, CrossFit gyms,
martial area, spin studios, parkour places, rock climbing and dance studios) and
suggested many of these belonged in this zoning district as well. Barnhart noted
“gymnasiums” in the district would require a building wall 20 feet high or higher,
with anything under in height considered retail.
Farr proposed a text change on page two, line 55 to require a condition to also
include the redevelopment if it was also in the Pioneer Trail study. Barnhart
suggested the language be amended to reference “any special area studies
applicable”. Farr suggested another change on page 4, line 112, Item B with stated
that a sidewalk be provided that would connects the principal front door be
changed to “each front door” of the principal building. Barnhart agreed.
MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Kirk to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 7-0.
Farr commended the proposed new zoning district. Grote asked how broad the 40
foot high restriction was. Barnhart replied he did not know exactly but this was
consistent across most of the city, and staff could look at it. He did not suggest a
change for the Flex Service which would increase the height, as this was more
appropriate for the Commercial zoned areas. Developments near the Flying Cloud
airport are also under a height restriction.
Kirk echoed Farr’s comments, stating this was a reasonable approach to dealing
with “interesting” areas of the City. He also agreed with Mette’s suggestion of
including dance studios and martial arts facilities, et cetera. Farr suggested this
could be taken up later in the Zoning Ordinance Definitions discussion. Mette
agreed, and added a retail exception might allow some of her suggested
businesses. Discussion followed on motion language.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Grote to approve an Ordinance amending
City Code Chapter 11 creating a Flex Service Zoning District as represented in
the June 12, 2023 staff report, including appropriate wording comments made at
the meeting. Motion carried 7-0.
B. CODE AMENDMENT FOR PARKING REGULATIONS
Request for:
• Amend City Code Chapter 11 relating to Parking regulations
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 12, 2023
Page 4
Barnhart presented the staff report. This amendment included a reorganization of
regulations for clarity, while also providing flexibility for compact cars, revise the
process for shared parking, adjust parking requirements for certain uses (banks,
gymnasiums, nursing homes, large shopping centers) and define parking
standards for others (day care centers).
Recognizing that the provision of parking can be a major expense for businesses,
there is a desire to not require excessive parking. The draft proposes up to 10
percent of required parking would be marked for compact cars and may be
counted toward required parking, provided that the applicant met the following
standards:
All stalls had to be a minimum of 8 feet wide and 16 feet long for 90 degree stalls,
and the most recent ITE standards for others had to be followed for parking
angled differently than 90 degrees.
Shared parking would be allowed, especially off-street parking in a shared facility
for two or more uses with substantially different hours of operation.
Requirements for a development or redevelopment project might be reduced up to
20 percent if the following standards were met:
Shared between 2 or more complimentary uses; A shared parking plan; Applicant
demonstrates no substantial conflict in the peak parking demands of the uses and
adequate amount of parking to meet the needs. This parking plan would be
approved by the city.
The draft reduces parking for banks reducing it from 6/1000 sf of gross floor area
to 5/1000.
Day care has no specific requirement currently, but staff recommends one stall
per employee on largest work shift plus one per business vehicle plus one per
every six children.
Gymnasiums would move from 5/1000 sf of gross floor area to 2.5/1000. There
was a wide variation in other cities on this, and we are not increasing the non-
conforming status of current uses.
Standards were also set for retail and shopping centers, and nursery/assisted
living. Staff recommended approval.
Grote asked for and received confirmation state and federal ADA requirements
would apply. He asked if electric vehicles were included in the change. Barnhart
replied they were not included as this will continue to be worked out on a case-
by-case basis, but he could envision required EV parking in the future.
Mette asked for and received clarification that apartment with retail below did not
require a separate agreement as it would be memorialized in the development
agreement. Mette made a text change to recorded against “any applicable
properties” instead of “against both properties” on line 116 [no page given]. She
also corrected a typo on the table for shopping centers from 4.24/1000 to
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 12, 2023
Page 5
4.25/1000. She asked for and received clarification of the definition of a shopping
center as being over 200,000 square feet, which she wanted included in the
Ordinance. Barnhart noted that the definition of shopping center was included in
the Mixed Use Zoning District text.
Farr expressed approval of the parking reduction for banks and stated he would
have gone down to 4/1000. He commended the covered parking requirement
change and accommodations for compact parking stalls and urged their
convenient location. He added gymnasium parking was so variable that this
change would be a wonderful opportunity for shared use. Discussion followed on
including a parking provision for gymnasiums. Barnhart stated he would rather
look into the potential for the Flex Service model for gymnasiums and other
similar uses before implementing it here.
Farr asked at what point did Eden Prairie suggest a traffic study to supplement an
applicant’s parking data. He feared seeing parking on the street after an
application was approved. Barnhart replied every project required some level of
traffic analysis, and parking expectations were weighed against this in the site
design as part of the application process.
Grote noted the golf course was the only outdoor activity mentioned, which
allowed 72 spaces. He noted an outdoor facility such as a football or baseball
stadium would require more parking. Barnhart stated there was the golf course
use requirement plus any spaces required of the clubhouse.
Mette stated the Code established a minimum, and the commission could not
require an applicant to exceed it. The parking plan was to ask for relief, so there
was a potential issue of a higher use than what the applicant indicated. Farr
agreed, but stated he was satisfied with staff’s response of potential problems
being caught via administrative process.
MOTION: Weber moved, seconded by Taylor to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 7-0.
Farr agreed with staff’s recommendations for the parking requirements. Kirk
stated this appeared to be a very reasonable proposal, echoing Weber’s lament
years ago regarding “acres and acres of asphalt.” Grote stated he was concerned
about the golf courses and suggested a metric of 1.25 times the 72 as a buffer for
those warming up and/or lined up to play. Barnhart offered to do some analysis of
the golf course parking minimum and bring the data to the commission.
MOTION: Grote moved, seconded by Taylor to approve the Code Amendment
Chapter 11 relating to parking regulations as represented in the June 12, 2023
staff report with the modifications to line 116 to say, “against any applicable
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 12, 2023
Page 6
properties” and the correction of the shopping center parking table proportion to
4.25. Motion carried 7-0.
PLANNERS’ REPORT
MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Taylor moved, seconded by Kirk to adjourn. Motion carried 8-0. The
meeting was adjourned at 8:08 p.m.